Bischoff, et al v. Brittain, et al

Filing 60

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 11/3/2015. Defendant's 59 Motion to Quash is DENIED without prejudice to its renewal in proper District. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SCOTT BISCHOFF, et al.,

12
13
14

No. 2:14-cv-1970 KJM CKD

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER

SANDRA BRITTAIN, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Defendant has noticed a motion to quash for hearing on November 18, 2015. The

18

subpoena at issue calls for production of documents at a law office located in Redwood City,

19

which is located in the Northern District of California. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

20

45(d)(3), a motion to quash must be brought in the court for the district where compliance is

21

required. The motion to quash was therefore improvidently filed in this District.

22

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s motion to quash (ECF No. 59)

23

is denied without prejudice to its renewal in the proper District.

24

Dated: November 3, 2015

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26
27
28

4 bischoff1970.mtq